Office of the Historian

695A.00/1–1554: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in India1

secret
niact
Washington, January 15, 1954—7:31 p.m.

839. Your 1094;2 Deptel 829.3 Assume text Thimayya’s January 14 letter4 available you. Telegraphing separately through military channels text reply General Hull authorized make.5

Main purposes our reply are make clear:

(1)
Communist intransigence made it impossible NNRC fully accomplish mission and led to breakdown explanations. Same cause prevented Political Conference from meeting. Nevertheless, in our opinion NNRC will be defaulting on its obligation under terms reference by returning prisoners before expiration period custody and by failing declare their release to civilian status.
(2)
We can not accept prisoners on terms defined Thimayya’s letter implying we should retain them in prisoner status until Political Conference meets and considers their disposition.
(3)
If CFI unilaterally return custody POWs 20 January UNC would clearly not be justified using force against them but from humanitarian considerations and to insure them full enjoyment benefits Agreement UNC would arrange for their accommodation and disposition.
(4)
Return prior January 23 is failure by NNRC fully discharge its duties but this does not affect POWs right become civilians that date and UNC in accordance Agreement on POWs will honor obligation treat them as fully entitled freedom as civilians on January 23.

[Page 1728]

For your information we want avoid any implication we understand or could accept Thimayya’s letter as an interpretation under paragraph 24 Terms of Reference.

Time public release reply Thimayya’s letter will be determined Tokyo.

Dulles
  1. This telegram was drafted by McClurkin and cleared with De Palma, Runyon, Henry T. Smith (Deputy Director, Office of South Asian Affairs), and Bacon. It was repeated to Munsan-ni as 202, Seoul as 599, and Tokyo as 1665 with instructions to pass to CINCUNC.↩
  2. Dated Jan. 12, p. 1718.↩
  3. In this telegram, Jan. 14, the Department of State informed the Embassy in New Delhi that until it received a text of Thimayya’s letter and Hull’s proposed reply, it was holding up its response to telegram 1094 from Seoul. (695A.0024/1–1454)↩
  4. For text, see Department of State Bulletin, Jan. 25, 1954, pp. 113–115.↩
  5. For text, see ibid., pp. 115–116.↩